Fox0r wrote:Our offense also wasn't up to snuff prior to that. I think people are overrating the loss of Chris Clemons.

Can you explain why?

Because my argument for that being an issue is he's the only player in our base defense who can get to the passer and with +30 sacks in the last three seasons, he's clearly one of the best pass rushers in the league. I'm not sure how you overrate losing a guy like that for a big playoff game.

No amount of bellyaching makes the fact that we're #1 in the NFL in scoring defense go away. That was despite having no pass rush. That was not some sort of magic or accident. The coaches know we aren't getting pressure. They don't do anything to "fix" it. The fix would be worse than the cure and we are the BEST IN THE NFL. If this is such a "valid concern" why are we #1 in the NFL in scoring defense?

We don't "find a way to win". That's a backhanded compliment, in fact an insult. Like we're just squeaking by with new tricks up our sleeves each week, always on our heels. You know who's on their heels? Our opponents. That's why we lead the NFL in scoring defense. That's why we're like 3rd in margin of victory. We play the same way every week. There's no tricks.

We play defense the same way every time and yet people still don't understand how it works. We don't give up big plays. We are great in the red zone. We make the other team have to string together lots of first downs and then we hold you to a field goal if you survive that gauntlet. We have great players that execute this scheme amazingly well. We do this every game and every game it works.

It's dumbfounding to me that suddenly Atlanta, a team that played the easiest schedule in the NFL and struggled with it, is world beaters. Someone said they're going to beat us by 14! You realize Atlanta has played lots of teams with no pass rush this year, right? Where are all the blow outs from this unstoppable force from Atlanta? Where is this anxiety coming from?

No one knows, it could be a shootout. But, as of now, you have no legitimate argument. It's far, FAR more likely that a team that feasted on poor defenses will then not reach its season average when playing the #1 scoring defense in the NFL.

#1

#1 scoring defense in the NFL. Never had a pass rush. Don't need one. Still #1. Not an illusion. Not a mystery. #1.

Of all the major North American sports, football has the largest element of chance. Atlanta could very well beat us. But it won't be because we don't have a pass rush. Seattle is the better football team and wins this game 65% of the time. Maybe next year we'll draft or trade for someone and get AZ style base pass rush. If that happens, we'll start giving up negative points per game.

Clemons being out doesn't mean we're going to field 10 guys. Someone else will be on the field to take his place. Last week, we seemed to do just pretty darn dandy with Clemons out. Worst case scenario is a marginal reduction in some aspects of defensive efficiency. Best case, and not at all unlikely, fresh legs and fresh personnel groupings reveals exciting new unprepared for advantages.

Fox0r wrote:Our offense also wasn't up to snuff prior to that. I think people are overrating the loss of Chris Clemons.

Can you explain why?

Because my argument for that being an issue is he's the only player in our base defense who can get to the passer and with +30 sacks in the last three seasons, he's clearly one of the best pass rushers in the league. I'm not sure how you overrate losing a guy like that for a big playoff game.

Part of me wants to believe we overvalue Clem and that Bruce can just slide over and do his job as good if not better. Mostly that's the part of me that's pissed off that he got injured.

BullHawk33 wrote:I agree that we will lose this game if Matt Ryan isn't pressured and can pick and choose his targets at will. That said, we've still managed a way to keep close all year against some very good teams. If we solve this, we win.

I have a TON of faith in our defensive backfield though to make the passes that do get thrown as difficult as possible and the YAC attempts as painful as possible.

I dunno Ryan racked up 400+ yards on the Saints and the Falcons still lost. My boss is a huge Saints fan, grew up in Louisiana played at LSU, he said you guys get up on them early and run the ball down their throat no way you lose. If they perceive the wheels are coming off they will wilt.

Fox0r wrote:Our offense also wasn't up to snuff prior to that. I think people are overrating the loss of Chris Clemons.

Can you explain why?

Because my argument for that being an issue is he's the only player in our base defense who can get to the passer and with +30 sacks in the last three seasons, he's clearly one of the best pass rushers in the league. I'm not sure how you overrate losing a guy like that for a big playoff game.

Most of the time, Big Red is playing opposite of Clemons on 1st and 2nd down, if you take out Clem and put in Bruce, it is really a push in terms of rushing the passer -- maybe a slight difference, but negligible in my opinion. For all we know, Bruce could bring MORE consistent pressure given the additional looks and snaps played. Maybe a slight drop in our ability to defend the run, but I have faith in our linebackers' range and ability to close the gaps and make up the difference. Atlanta isn't really a rushing juggernaut, anyhow, and Michael Turner is slow as molasses. Can we really say with confidence that Irvin is a liability in run defense? He hasn't really needed to care about that assignment until now.

The main concern may be on passing downs where we're forced to fill the void left by Bruce moving to Clem's spot, but I feel confident in our team's ability to bring pressure with other looks. Realistically, Bruce wasn't consistently getting a lot of pressure on the QB during passing downs most of the time, anyhow. We haven't really had the world's most dominant pass rush even with Clem and Bruce in the games together at the same time. A huge majority of their sacks came in 3 or so games and we've been fine.

Not having Clemons stings, but I have confidence Irvin is going to get some pressure back there.

All that said.. the games the Falcons lost, Matt Ryan had a sensational day and it wasn't enough. At the end of the day, it's on the Seahawks offense to control clock and score touchdowns instead of field goals in the red zone.

I don't think so, at least IMO. I don't think a lack of pass rush will be the deciding factor in this game as it hasn't been for the majority of games all season it seems. Even in the GB game we barely won even though we sacked AR 8 times!

formido wrote:Clemons being out doesn't mean we're going to field 10 guys. Someone else will be on the field to take his place. Last week, we seemed to do just pretty darn dandy with Clemons out. Worst case scenario is a marginal reduction in some aspects of defensive efficiency. Best case, and not at all unlikely, fresh legs and fresh personnel groupings reveals exciting new unprepared for advantages.

Y'know, I think the argument can be made pretty easily that Clem's production over the last few years has been as much a result of the scheme as it is a result of the talent of Chris Clemons. I absolutely love the dude and respect the hell out of what he brings, but if Clem is such an amazing talent and an unreplaceable piece of the puzzle that we're doomed without him, where was his production in all the years he was in the NFL prior to becoming the Leo DE in Pete Carroll's 4-3 under defense?

Now we spent a 1st round draft pick on Bruce Irvin because he has all the tools required to play the Leo DE in Pete Carroll's 4-3 under defense. I'm willing to bet that pass rush production from the Leo side of the field won't go down. I'm a little worried about production from the "Raheem Brock" side of the field now that we're going to be relying on Greg Scruggs and a 33 year old workout warrior who hasn't played in 4 years. Scruggs can bring it, but to the same level that Irvin did over there? <shrug> I don't know, but I don't think it will be as big a let down as many are thinking.

Thanks for the pep talk Formido. I've decided that I am no longer worried about our ability to apply pressure to Matt Ryan or the loss of Chris Clemons. the only place where I think Clem is clearly better than Irvin is in run support, but Atlanta sucks at running the ball anyway so I'm not going to worry about it...

Last edited by CANHawk on Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

This poster officially refuses to recognize SacHawk2.0 as a moderator or authority figure of any description.

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:Because my argument for that being an issue is he's the only player in our base defense who can get to the passer and with +30 sacks in the last three seasons, he's clearly one of the best pass rushers in the league. I'm not sure how you overrate losing a guy like that for a big playoff game.

I don't agree that he's one of the best pass rushers in the league. He gets sacks, but not consistent pressure. Otherwise we wouldn't be sitting around talking about "no pass rush". Clemons is very hot and cold from play to play and generally our opponents have been unhurried.

Last edited by MontanaHawk05 on Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Falcan Moore wrote:You simply have to get pressure on Ryan without the blitz. I don't have the stats on me, but I know this year he's had something like a 96.1 rating against the blitz. I'm actually curious as to how good he's been in years past, too.

Yep. I noticed in that game against New Orleans (will watch the Carolina one later), that the times the Saints were able to generate pressure with just 3-4 guys.. Ryan was pressed into making some tough decisions, and that's when he indeed made mistakes. They were few and far between that game, but they did happen..

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:Because my argument for that being an issue is he's the only player in our base defense who can get to the passer and with +30 sacks in the last three seasons, he's clearly one of the best pass rushers in the league. I'm not sure how you overrate losing a guy like that for a big playoff game.

I don't agree that he's one of the best pass rushers in the league. He gets sacks, but not consistent pressure. Otherwise we wouldn't be sitting around talking about "no pass rush". Clemons is very hot and cold from play to play and generally our opponents have been unhurried. Don't ask me how we've managed the #1 scoring defense against one of the toughest schedules without a pass rush, because I haven't figured out how yet.I think our secondary, honestly, pressures QB's more than anyone else.

Word. I have noticed a lot of qb's either throwing it into the 2nd row or dumping it off to a checkdown for minimal gain against our secondary. I'm not super confident in being able to contain the dynamic trio over there long enough to get sacks, but hopefully we can hold them long enough for Ryan to give up on plays and get rid of the rock.

I like this thread. I went from being so bunged up about our lack of pass rush that I was ready to sell out what we do well for cockameme blitzes from the bandit to saying "meh, we got this".

Thanks English!

This poster officially refuses to recognize SacHawk2.0 as a moderator or authority figure of any description.

formido wrote:#1 scoring defense in the NFL. Never had a pass rush. Don't need one. Still #1. Not an illusion. Not a mystery. #1.

I think everyone's well aware of that. But you're not really providing anything but vague platitudes as to how Seattle is defying conventional wisdom this way.

It's not like we went undefeated. Our 11-5 was a razor's edge. We faced some very bad quarterbacks (Sanchez, Ponder, Newton, Arizona) who didn't need to be pressured in order to suck, we faced some defensive-oriented teams (Rams, 49ers), and while we also beat some very good QB's, we either barely beat them because of no pass rush (Brady), lost to them because of no pass rush (Stafford), or beat them WITH PASS RUSH (Rodgers). Not to mention Jason Jones providing interior pressure all year.

I'm scratching my head as to how Seattle accomplished the #1 defense without pass rush, but I'm not so quick to just throw one of the cornerstones of modern NFL defenses to the wind unless I get some better analysis as to why.

I think its important to note that pressure doesn't always constitute sacks. I feel like they can scheme some pressure, because all you really need is to get Matt Ryan fading back a little in the pocket and make him uncomfortable. Qb's hate guys around their feet.

I've got my doubts about how well Irvin can hold up and wouldn't be surprised if Scruggs was in there on running downs and Irvin on passing downs.

I wouldn't be surprised if we got thumped by a couple touchdowns, but I also wouldn't be surprised if we thumped them by a couple touchdowns.

Mike Smith reminds me of Marty Schottenheimer and Bill Cowher(until 2005), both of those coaches tightened up to a maddening degree in the playoffs and it reflected in playcalling and the psyche of their teams. When they gambled, it was often needless(Mike Smith last year against the Giants). I'm interested to see how the Falcons come out, I wouldn't be surprised if they started the game firing the ball downfield to try and get up early rather than do what they should do and attack us on the edges with the running game.

Its also important to note that when the Seahawks have brought pressure this year, those rare times, its been very successful. For a team that doesn't blitz much, they time and disguise it tremendously. I'd expect to see more blitzes, not an excessive amount, but enough to make Matt Ryan second guess his pre snap read. Against the Seahawks secondary, that's all that needs to happen. Make Ryan think twice, make him hesitate, make him uncomfortable and we can hold our own in the passing game.

Regardless of what happens, I've enjoyed the hell out of this team this year.

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:Not being overly negative here... I think we've had a fantastic season. I think we'll come back even stronger next year and if we avoid injuries, could well have a rematch against the Falcons only this time we have the home field advantage. The Seahawks are going in absolutely the right direction, I just think we'll come up short against a #1 seed, 13-3 team on the road. The reason...?

LACK OF PRESSURE ON MATT RYAN

I think we'll struggle, once again, to get pressure in base defense. I watched the Cardinals @ Falcons game and the one thing (only thing?) Arizona does well is pass rush. It amazes me that Ray Horton hasn't got the Cards' Head Coach gig simply to keep him as part of that franchise. They got at Ryan and forced mistakes. He's not too mobile, he likes to have time. Give him that time and he'll kill you - especially with the options he has at WR/TE. He threw FIVE interceptions against Arizona and scored no touchdowns. They scraped to victory 23-19 despite Arizona having 70 total passing yards in that game. The reason? Pass rush, pass rush, pass rush.

Unfortunately, we are nowhere near as effective rushing the passer. Our base defense generates almost no pressure at all and we don't blitz. Carroll and Bradley have barely blitzed all year and they aren't going to start now against a QB like Ryan. They'll be scared of getting burned - any coaching staff would have that fear blitzing Ryan with those receivers. I suspect it might be a case of 'which way are we least likely to get beat?' and they'll try and play bend but don't break. We've played some of the worst offensive lines in the NFL this year and dominated only once (vs Green Bay). Now we're going to try and dominate a decent enough line without our best pass rusher. That'll be very difficult.

Chris Clemons is a huge miss and although I like Bruce Irvin and believe he will grow into the NFL, I don't think is the game for him. Atlanta is really going to test his ability to defend the run early I fear, and if he struggles I think we'll see Scruggs playing more and more snaps as the game goes on. If we end up fielding a four man line of Bryant, Mebane, Branch and Scruggs more often than not - I don't like our chances of getting pressure on Ryan. Our best chance to do so might be to maybe lean to that side and put more pressure on Bryant to hold up his side of the bargain. We need to be in a position to keep Irvin on the field and he has to make the most of his chances.

I trust Russell Wilson and our offense to score points too and I don't think it's impossible for us to win a shoot-out. But that's the type of game I think it'll be, and it's not the type that suits us the best. Ryan is going to get time back there and however good Sherman/Browner and the other DB's are, they can't cover Julio Jones, Roddy White and Tony Gonzalez forever while Ryan sits in a clean pocket. I expect all three of their key playmakers, plus Ryan, to have a big day.

When Atlanta's lost playoff games in the past - Ryan has been pressured. New York last year, he had no time. Green Bay before that, the same. Against us I'm worried that won't be the case. So it'll be up to our offense to answer every call. It'll be up to the defense to see if they can bend but not break (tough vs Gonzalez in the red zone). But ultimately I think there's going to come a time in the second half where they edge ahead and pull away - something like 34-20 in the end.

Maybe the pressure on Ryan/Smith takes its toll? I just think this Falcons team is too good to keep bottling it. 0-4 in the playoffs? That would be some accomplishment given how talented they are. They'll be right on this one and if we're going to beat them, we'll have to do it with equally brilliant offense. I'd love Wilson to do it but I'm not expecting even he to do that.

Hope I'm completely wrong. I will happily eat crow if I am. I won't boast if I'm right. I want us desperately to win this game. But our biggest off-season priority has to be finding a better pass rush in base defense. If we get that in 2014, we have a shot at going 13-3 ourselves.

You do realize you said we would lose against Washington don't you? You are wrong again.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:I don't agree that he's one of the best pass rushers in the league. He gets sacks, but not consistent pressure. Otherwise we wouldn't be sitting around talking about "no pass rush". Clemons is very hot and cold from play to play and generally our opponents have been unhurried.

I bet there's not another pass rusher in the NFL with +30 sacks over the last three years playing as the sole pass rusher in a four man base front.

How many other productive pass rushers play in a four man front with guys like Bryant, Mebane and Branch? Bryant - 0 sacks in 2012. Branch - 1 sack in 2012. Mebane - 3 sacks in 2012.

I am sure Pete Carroll shares the same concerns as you do and will understand the need to pressure Ryan. With Clemons out I dont think Pete will wait long to bring extra guys to compensate for his loss.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:I'm scratching my head as to how Seattle accomplished the #1 defense without pass rush, but I'm not so quick to just throw one of the cornerstones of modern NFL defenses to the wind unless I get some better analysis as to why.

Isn't it obvious? I don't mean that in a sniping or smartassy way. Honest. Our D-line is good, but not elite. Same with the linebackers, though they are improving and we might consider it an elite unit next year. Secondary, on the other...Elite.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:I'm scratching my head as to how Seattle accomplished the #1 defense without pass rush, but I'm not so quick to just throw one of the cornerstones of modern NFL defenses to the wind unless I get some better analysis as to why.

Isn't it obvious? I don't mean that in a sniping or smartassy way. Honest. Our D-line is good, but not elite. Same with the linebackers, though they are improving and we might consider it an elite unit next year. Secondary, on the other...Elite.

Well, the paradigm has always been that good QB's will find windows against any secondary if they're given long enough. (Russell Wilson has taken that paradigm and shoved it into overdrive this year.) Given Kam and Browner's susceptibilities...I dunno. Maybe a secondary scheme can substitute for pass rush? I just wish I had X's and O's on it.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:Well, the paradigm has always been that good QB's will find windows against any secondary if they're given long enough. (Russell Wilson has taken that paradigm and shoved it into overdrive this year.) Given Kam and Browner's susceptibilities...I dunno. Maybe a secondary scheme can substitute for pass rush? I just wish I had X's and O's on it.

That has definitely been the thinking for as long as I can remember. Seems like we might be inventing a new way of thinking, though. I'd love to see one of the geniuses at Football Outsiders or one of our resident Xs & Os gurus break it down somehow.

Dirty Bird wrote:It doesn't help that Marshawn Lynch missed practice for the second day in a row.

That's been par for the course this season. There's no reason to expect you to know that, however.

Back to the OP. I've only watched Redskins game three times now and I haven't noticed any drop off in pressurewhen Clemons came out. As other have noted, the pressure actually seemed to increase. Griffin's lack of mobilitywas a factor, the backup coming in was a factor, but it was still their O-Line in the game.

We got burned a couple of times during the last couple of drives, but those still stalled and we were focused on stoppingthe quick score, I believe.

Clemons has 3 more sacks than Irvin, while playing, probably twice as many snaps. (Couldn't find the info, so not sure of the snap count). Its going to be hard for anyone to prove to me that we'll lose a ton on pass rush from the LEO spot. Might lose some from the Raheem Brock role, but I feel Bruce can pressure the qb just as well as Clem. I do feel the coaching staff finds Irvin a liability in the run game, hence why Clem was still the full time LEO.

The best way to compensate for the lack of pressure is Marshaun Lynch. Keep Matty Ice off the field. Bully and wear down the Falcons defense. See how/if Ryan and Smith get antsy with lopsided TOP (they will).

The Hawks can control and dominate this game, defensively and offensively, through their OL.

The Hawks lack of pressure is kind of by design. Keep everything in front and make a team earn HARD yards and sustain punishment for there drives. Its worked all year, no reason to think it won't this time.

Last edited by pehawk on Thu Jan 10, 2013 5:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

formido wrote:Clemons being out doesn't mean we're going to field 10 guys. Someone else will be on the field to take his place. Last week, we seemed to do just pretty darn dandy with Clemons out. Worst case scenario is a marginal reduction in some aspects of defensive efficiency. Best case, and not at all unlikely, fresh legs and fresh personnel groupings reveals exciting new unprepared for advantages.

Y'know, I think the argument can be made pretty easily that Clem's production over the last few years has been as much a result of the scheme as it is a result of the talent of Chris Clemons. I absolutely love the dude and respect the hell out of what he brings, but if Clem is such an amazing talent and an unreplaceable piece of the puzzle that we're doomed without him, where was his production in all the years he was in the NFL prior to becoming the Leo DE in Pete Carroll's 4-3 under defense?

Now we spent a 1st round draft pick on Bruce Irvin because he has all the tools required to play the Leo DE in Pete Carroll's 4-3 under defense. I'm willing to bet that pass rush production from the Leo side of the field won't go down. I'm a little worried about production from the "Raheem Brock" side of the field now that we're going to be relying on Greg Scruggs and a 33 year old workout warrior who hasn't played in 4 years. Scruggs can bring it, but to the same level that Irvin did over there? <shrug> I don't know, but I don't think it will be as big a let down as many are thinking.

Thanks for the pep talk Formido. I've decided that I am no longer worried about our ability to apply pressure to Matt Ryan or the loss of Chris Clemons. the only place where I think Clem is clearly better than Irvin is in run support, but Atlanta sucks at running the ball anyway so I'm not going to worry about it...

Couldn't agree more with both of you. Our pass rushing ability has been our weakest link all year and we've been just fine. I'd be worried if it was Earl Thomas or Sherm that went down. We can compensate with the loss of Clem. I love Clem but its not like we're losing Demarcus Ware or Dwight Freeney. I honestly don't think our pass rush will noticeably suffer. Losing Clem's defense against the run is more of a concern for me but the Falcons blow at running the ball.

None of those QB's... IMO... capitalise on a lack of pressure as well as Matt Ryan does throwing to White, Jones and Gonzalez.

That is why I'm a little concerned here. The lack of pass rush has still been an issue, we've just found other ways to win. That could easily happen again against Atlanta. But this could be also be an overdue game where a lack of pass rush finally comes home to roost.

Actually, the pass rush isn't the biggest worry for me when it comes to winning this game. The biggest factor Seattle needs to watch is not turning the ball over. Atlanta's strength is forcing the turnover on defense so if we can hold onto the ball, drive down the field consistently, and punch in for TD's we have a very good chance of winning. Yeah, the Falcons have a good tight end, the Pat's had two of them and also a deadly running game. Atlanta doesn't have as good of a running game as NE. We were able to force Brady into turnovers, really one of the only games he had this season turning the ball over more than once. We don't need to blitz like crazy, just play the game they have been playing and force the check downs and such and get those timely stops in the red zone. All you can do is limit good QB's really unless you have 4 all pro D-Linemen constantly destroying the QB. I think we'll be fine and win this game, 24-17.

HawkGANG wrote:None of those QB's... IMO... capitalise on a lack of pressure as well as Matt Ryan does throwing to White, Jones and Gonzalez.

against what teams? the Packers? the Patriots? the Bears? the Niners?

let me ask you this, have the Falcons even seen an Elite Defense this year?

Hawks have, they beat em all once..

I,m looking through the ATL schedule and I cant find the elite defenses? fact of the matter is have the Falcons even played an elite team all year long? maybe, if you considered the Skins were Elite entering week 5 @ 2-2...

maybe the Giants or the Saints were the Elite Ds they hammered on week in and week out? lol

Twisted wrote:against what teams? the Packers? the Patriots? the Bears? the Niners?

let me ask you this, have the Falcons even seen an Elite Defense this year?

Hawks have, they beat em all once..

I,m looking through the ATL schedule and I cant find the elite defenses? fact of the matter is have the Falcons even played an elite team all year long? maybe, if you considered the Skins were Elite entering week 5 @ 2-2...

maybe the Giants or the Saints were the Elite Ds they hammered on week in and week out? lol

Firstly, I'm talking about a very specific issue within our defense that I feel will be a problem against the Falcons offense. Saying "Errr... Elite defense" is not a counter to this specific problem. It doesn't address that our strength (DB's) might be neutralised by the time Matt Ryan has in the pocket. And as I mentioned in an earlier post, Ryan is much more clinical and prolific at taking advantage of a non-existent pass rush than the likes of Sam Bradford, Ryan Fitzgerald, John Skelton, Ryan Tannehill, Mark Sanchez and a lot of the other QB's we've faced recently.

For what it's worth, I would say Denver's defense is as good as ours, if not better. And not many teams have beaten Denver this year.

After watching us respond to getting punched in the mouth/caught off guard to the tune of 14 points and then seeing the way we responded I'm not worried about the Falcons. Are they good? Hell yes, but not as good as we are all the way around. If our guys want it bad enough it will be ours. It will be an exiting game but in the end if we play the way we have been over the last few weeks we move on to the next round.

None of those QB's... IMO... capitalise on a lack of pressure as well as Matt Ryan does throwing to White, Jones and Gonzalez.

That is why I'm a little concerned here. The lack of pass rush has still been an issue, we've just found other ways to win. That could easily happen again against Atlanta. But this could be also be an overdue game where a lack of pass rush finally comes home to roost.

I don't think so because getting pressure on the QB just isn't in our defensive scheme otherwise I believe we would of blitzed a whole lot more this year. I feel Pete's mentality is to force turnovers and to keep players in front of you and not give up the big play. Now I'm not saying I believe Pete shuns the pass rush I just believe he's evaluated our defense enough to understand what it's strengths and weaknesses are and he's devised a scheme to give our guys the best chance to succeed. If we had that pro bowl pass rusher I'm sure our defensive scheme would change..but we don't.

Regarding all the QBs you named...listen my argument is less about if a pass rush on Ryan would be more effective rather than saying QB pressure just isn't and has not been a major part of our defensive scheme, and since it has worked to some effect during the regular season it's not gonna change for the playoffs.

Why do you guys always find something every week to be worried about and say we are going to lose, I mean come on. Last week a bunch of people said the game was over after the first quarter, I think those are the worst type of fans

The best way to defend the Falcons is to keep our offense on the field. Our running game will be critical to our success on offense. Our defense will be very challenged by their receivers. I'm concerned about the 7-12 yard area. Our LB's will have to step up.

Lack of pressure has been our biggest problem all year (or at least since Jason Jones went down), but it's been the lack of interior pressure up the middle from the DTs. We'll continue to bring heat from the ends with irvin and scruggs and hopefully we'll continue to be able to overcome that lack of pressure up the middle allowing qbs to step up into the pocket.

Nothing really all that different from the last month or so...

This poster officially refuses to recognize SacHawk2.0 as a moderator or authority figure of any description.

Saints gave up the most yards in the history of the NFL this year, but somehow stifled ATLs high powered passing game in their most recent game in ATL (the game where Brees threw 5 picks)... Falcons only garnered 286 yds of total offense, 166 through the air.. Me thinks that film might be one to take a look at..

it will be a great chess match between our DBs/their WRs and our running game vs their front 7.

But really this team is all business in preparing itself. Wilson has quite the growing reputation, but some there some things that have taken place this year that prove this team is taking being prepared seriously.

Forget the Wilson story for a moment, Think Richard Sherman instead. Richard Sherman had a sack that was completely based on what Pete was teaching in training camp. It was a specific kind of alignment, that was only shown to the defense once, and Pete had instructed Richard Sherman that regardless of whatever we are doing on defense, you see this formation you just blitz. I believe it was in the Jets game when they had an alignment with an tackle lined up as an eligible receiver and Sherman ditched whatever the current defensive scheme was and went with the preparation from training camp based on that look.

The Fake Field goal when the Hawks got accused of running up the score. I am sure most people are aware of Pete's explanation about it, that it was again an automatic thing to do if a very specific formation lined up against them. It wasn't called, but it was prepared for in a way that compelled them to automatically just run the play as coached.

These two things really stand out to me about this team, among so many other things that speak about the preparation. Nobody is on this asking or second guessing what they have been taught about what they are suppose to do.

Statistically this game has a lot to say about a really good Offense in Atlanta being interesting against a really good defense with a battle between top corners and wide receivers. Sure there is some drama about whether Irvin can make a switch to Clemons spot and be effective, but I am not really scared or worried or anything about this team. The Seahawks will be prepared when they show up in Atlanta. I think it will be a good match up.

In fact, I think the Seahawks Offense versus Atlanta's defense is where the advantage shifts statistically. The Seahawks are a better passing team then they might appear on paper, and keying the run isn't going to kill the Hawks even if Atlanta does shut our run game down.

If anything, I just don't think the Hawks are yet hitting on all cylinders. As good as they are, they have yet to reach their potential. My feelings about the Seahawks is that they could lose this game, and realize how good of a team they really are next year. Or its going to happen this game. I don't mean a close game in the Seahawks favor. I mean a very solid win that shows how dominate they really are. I don't think they have yet shown how dominate the talent on this team is ... I think its close and they definitely understand they can beat anyone, but I am telling you, there is a next level just about ready to happen.

My question about Atlanta is whether there is a feeling about the Falcons still having another level of top performance in them? Because they may need it to even think about winning this game.

seahawks875 wrote:Why do you guys always find something every week to be worried about and say we are going to lose, I mean come on. Last week a bunch of people said the game was over after the first quarter, I think those are the worst type of fans

Yes I'm a terrible fan... especially when I stay up all night watching the games and go to work on zero hours sleep. And spend way too much money flying over for games whenever I can.

This is an internet chat forum for, you know, discussing things. I'd find the argument above a little more valid if I stood up mid-game at the CLINK, mounted a soap box and started lecturing those nearby on why we were going to lose.